A recent pairing of opinion blogs in the "Outlook & Opinions" in the Washington Post argue the actual benefit of the multi-billion ISS, and whether or not it's worth all of the trouble that NASA and others are going through to complete its construction.  Writer Michael Benson claims that the project is "going no where at a very high rate of speed," and continues by saying the ISS still has "virtually no purpose and is accomplishing nothing" as a scientific research platform.

A countering blog written by a former NASA contractor highlights the successes of the ISS, and why nations are willing to put so much time, effort and money into the project.

As even more money is being pumped into the ISS, there continues to be a growing discontent over the project that NASA hopes to complete before 2010.  Once the current shuttle is retired, there is an expected five-year gap until 2015, when NASA expects to roll out Orion.

The ISS has 15,000 cubic feet of livable space, 10 different modules, the ability to host five astronauts plus an extra one or two, and has fully-functioning research laboratories able to host a multitude of different experiments.  The project began in 1998, but suffered delays due to the shuttle Columbia disaster, and has suffered major budget issues over the past 10 years.

But with an estimated lifespan until 2015, the future of the ISS beyond that has remained very confusing amongst the five lead nations responsible for its construction.  Besides NASA and Russia, the European Space Agency, Japan and Canada have been responsible for providing financial support and hardware that has been used to create and add to the ISS.

Once completed in two years, the space station will have evolved into a $100-billion project that the five nations will be very unlikely to want to give up, and instead will be used until it's no longer feasible.  The head of the Russian Roskosmos space agency, Alexey Krasnov, said during the Multilateral Coordination Board last week his agency wants to add electrical-supply hardware and other technology aboard the ISS, and wants to keep it running as long as possible.

After launching habitable space modules to the ISS recently, both the ESA and JAXA said they intend to make use of their modules to help keep the ISS supported and operational.  NASA's Griffin said it is very unlikely NASA will turn its back on the ISS before 2016, but with the U.S. space agency's renewed interest in future missions to the moon and Mars, less money and supplies may be available for the ISS.

The five nations are actively talking about the financial and technical responsibilities that each nation will need to offer to help take care of the ISS until 2020 and beyond.  The U.S. Congress already said NASA should be prepared to support the ISS until 2020, and anything beyond that will be taken into consideration once the time comes.  Russia will have to take on an extra burden while helping transport NASA astronauts and cargo aboard its own rockets until NASA is able to complete the Aries-Orion shuttle in 2015.

Researchers also hope to be able to use the ISS as a working platform for possible manned mission to Mars, and as a proper stepping stone for supplies and astronauts on the way to the moon.  But Benson argues that stopping at the ISS on the way to Mars would be a waste of fuel and time to make a pit stop.

Despite the criticism, NASA, Russia and other space organizations continue in their effort to finish the space lab in the next two years.  Two cosmonauts working at the ISS recently installed a new docking target and also worked on several science experiments.

Regardless of whether or not journalists, the public, or space engineers approve of the ISS, developed space nations will continue to try and finish construction the next two years.  After the construction is completed, however, the five leading partners behind the ISS will continue to modify and fix the ISS until it is no longer economical to do so.